Category Archives: Other Stuff
Defending Life in the Public Square
Defending Life in the Public Square
By Jonathan Morrow
Few topics can cause more intense emotions (on both sides) than the ‘pro-life / pro-choice’ debate. As a result, it can become easy to hold a position without thinking through that position very carefully. We simply have an emotional reaction, one way or the other, and then adopt that as our default. In this short handout, I simply want to lay out some of the reasoning behind the pro-life position. This will include scientific, philosophical, and biblical evidence for us to consider.
Regardless of the view that one holds, if we are to make progress in this area of moral concern, then we must find common ground where it exists and learn to treat others with respect—even though we may passionately disagree at the end of the day. We do this because truth matters and truth doesn’t evaporate simply because people disagree.
Before exploring the evidence, I want to acknowledge that there are many deeply personal and social issues wrapped up in the topic of abortion. My intention is not to dismiss or minimize the pain, shame, or regret that women and men feel when the topic of abortion is raised. So as we look objectively at the moral status of the unborn, please remember that in Christ there is no condemnation (Rom. 8:1) and that God is in the business of redeeming and healing broken and wounded people—and all of us are in need of that.
In what follows I have tried to clarify the main biblical, scientific, and philosophical issues so that when these things come up in conversation or you try to think through them on your own you will have some helpful information to process.
I. Biblical Principle: Every human is valuable, has dignity, and was created with the capacity for relationship with God for His glory (Gen. 1:26-27; 2:7; 9:6, Ex. 20:13, Isa. 43:7; Ps. 139; Acts 17:28).
In light of this biblical principle, Christians should be pro-life. Now most of us when we hear that phrase, think only of the unborn or the issue of abortion. But this principle is much broader. We are called to care for, respect, and protect all human life for all of life. This includes the elderly, those with special needs, the homeless, the hungry, the orphan, the abused, and the forgotten—as well as the unborn. They are all precious in God’s eyes and we are to be their advocate (Jer. 22:15-16 cf. James 1:27). It also can’t be repeated enough that Christians’ reasons for being ‘pro-all-of-life’ are not attached to a political platform or ideology; they are grounded in solid philosophical, scientific, and biblical evidence.
II. Scientifically, there is no debate about when human life begins or whether it is a distinct genetic entity.
While many leading authorities and embryology textbooks could be cited, Dr. Hymie Gordon, professor of medical genetics and physician, at the Mayo Clinic clearly summarizes the consensus:
“I think we can now also say that the question of the beginning of life – when life begins – is no longer a question for theological or philosophical dispute. Theologians and philosophers may go on to debate the meaning of life or purpose of life, but it is an established fact that all life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception….”[1]
Moreover, the unborn human person is genetically distinct from both mother and father at conception. The growing human person is dependent on the mother in the womb, but is not part of the woman’s body. The main point here is that a woman may make choices regarding her own body; but the growing fetus (Latin for “little one”) is not technically part of her body. The relationship is more like a parent / child relationship. Parents act in the interest of or on behalf of their child — who is dependent on them — at various stages of development.
III. Philosophically, there is no relevant difference between an unborn and a newborn human person.
Using the S.L.E.D. acrostic, we can clearly see the four differences between the unborn and the newborn:
Size: We protect the basic rights of small people just the same as bigger people. 7’7” basketball player Yao Ming is not more valuable than someone who is 4 feet tall.
Level of development: An elderly human is a human, an adult human is human, a child human is human, a newborn human is human, and an unborn human is human. We protect human rights independently from stage of development.
Environment: Our human rights are unaffected by our changes of location. Where one is irrelevant to Who one is.
Dependency: Toddlers, people in nursing homes, people with pacemakers or artificial organs, people in need of blood transfusions to stay alive…are all dependent on something or someone else for life. Human beings are intrinsically valuable—regardless of their level of dependency. Viability does not determine value.
These differences are insignificant, and apart from these differences, a newborn and an unborn child are identical beings.
At the end of the day, there really is only one issue when it comes to abortion: What is the unborn? If the unborn is human, a full-fledged member of the human community, then they have all the rights you and I have. If the unborn is not human then abortion is simply the removal of body tissue. This is fundamentally a human rights question, not a religious question. There is no such thing as being ‘potentially a human.’ One either is or isn’t.
Q: What about the tragic circumstances of rape, incest, back-alley abortions, unwanted children, extreme poverty etc.?
A: First we need to acknowledge that these are tragic situations and they need to be addressed first and foremost in a spirit of love, compassion, and empathy. Too often, pro-life advocates jump to a “right answer” before seeking to understand and becoming part of a solution. In looking at these difficult situations, we need to revisit the only question that ultimately matters. What is the unborn? How we answer this question simplifies the debate—though it does not remove the hardship of these life situations.
In the situation of rape or incest: A great injustice has been done and the woman has been violated. But does that injustice justify the further injustice of having the baby’s life ended which is a violation of her rights? While this is a tragic circumstance, the number of pregnancies that actually result from rape or incest is very small (1 out of 100,000 cases).
Similarly, someone’s ability or desire to care for, provide for, or love the unborn does not change, confer, or remove the rights of the unborn. If a toddler was unloved, couldn’t be provided for, or might be abused we would think it absurd to suggest he could be killed. Why? Because he is a full-fledged member of the human race and has inherent value.
Regarding back-alley abortions by untrained people if ‘abortion on demand’ were limited by the law: It is always tragic when a woman loses her life or suffers permanent damage from an abortion. But this is not the fundamental issue. If the unborn are fully human, then this argument basically reduces to saying that “because people die or are harmed while killing other people (i.e., unborn people), the state should make it safe for them to do so.” When put like this, the fundamental issue becomes clear.
The Best Resources for Learning to Defend Life with Compassion and Clear Thinking:
· Klusendorf, Scott. The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009. (If you read just one book, read this one—it is clear and easy to read)
· Wagner, Stephen. Common Ground without Compromise: 25 Questions to Create Dialogue on Abortion. Signal Hill, CA: Stand to Reason, 2008. (learn where you can meet people in the middle and actually advance the conversation)
· Beckwith, Francis. Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case against Abortion Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. (This is the most sophisticated of the books and deals with the latest legal, philosophical, scientific arguments—it is excellent).
· Pro Life Training – www.prolifetraining.com
· Stand to Reason – www.str.org
· Abortion Changes You – www.abortionchangesyou.com (a pathway to healing)
[1] Francis Beckwith, Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case against Abortion Choice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 68. For the SLED approach, see Scott Klusendorf, The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009).
Good News of God’s Love and Hope for You – How to Begin a Relationship With God
No matter what you are going through, you need to know that God loves you beyond words, has promised to be with you, and offers you eternal life with Him that begins the moment you give your life to him. This video by Louie Giglio is a great reminder of that…Don’t let the big venue distract you, the message comes straight out of Isaiah 40:28-31 and is God’s promise to you.
28 Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The LORD is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.
29 He gives strength to the weary
and increases the power of the weak.
30 Even youths grow tired and weary,
and young men stumble and fall;
31 but those who hope in the LORD
will renew their strength.
They will soar on wings like eagles;
they will run and not grow weary,
they will walk and not be faint.
Would you like to know God personally? Here is how to begin your relationship with God. (Click Here)
“Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God”–John 1:12
Are Science and Faith Friends or Foes?
What is the relationship between science and faith? If you are a Christian and wanting a solid, biblical engagement with this question, then look no further than Science and Faith: Friends or Foes by C. John Collins. It is conversational in tone but doesn’t shy away from any of the conversational areas (Gen. 1-3, age of the earth, etc.). Here are some reviews and a description:
Reviews
“Collins maps the entire interface between faithful biblical interpretation and questions of all sorts posed in the name of the sciences. Interesting, fair-minded, shrewd, and clear from start to finish, this will prove outstanding as a pastoral resource.”
—J. I. Packer, Professor of Theology, Regent College
“There is something here for just about everyone. Science and Faith is required reading for all who are interested in the relationship between science and the Christian faith.”
—J. P. Moreland, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University
“This is a highly significant book on possibly the most important subject confronting the church today-the neutrality of science. A delightful style makes it easily accessible yet the author never neglects important issues. It is the best book of its kind for decades.”
—Ranald Macaulay, Speaker, L’Abri Fellowship; Coordinator, Christian Heritage, Cambridge
“Jack Collins is my kind of guy-a fellow MIT nerd. But he is much more: a brilliant scholar of biblical languages and a keen observer of the interaction between science and the Christian faith. This is a wonderful book, and I recommend it most strongly.”
—Henry F. Schaefer III, Professor of Chemistry and Director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry, University of Georgia
Product Description
Many believers worry that science undermines the Christian faith. Instead of fearing scientific discovery, Jack Collins believes that Christians should delight in the natural world and study it. God’s truth will stand against any challenge and will enrich the very scientific studies that we fear.
Collins first defines faith and science, shows their relation, and explains what claims each has concerning truth. Then he applies the biblical teaching on creation to the topics of “conflict” between faith and science, including the age of the earth, evolution, and miracles. He considers what it means to live in a created world. This book is for anyone looking for a Christian engagement with science without technical jargon.
The Wordview Behind Avatar and a Christian Perspective on Movies / Film
In case you missed it, Avatar is breaking all sorts of records (worldwide) at the box office. As many have pointed out, very cool special effects, and 3-D. But what is the worldview embedded or displayed in this film. Worldviews are not expressed in pop-culture as propositions in a syllogistic argument; rather they are “incarnated” and show you a way to be human and think about your world. Every artistic from does this. We aren’t merely entertained at the movies, we are instructed–whether that is fireproof, invictus, or avatar. So it is always appropriate to ask what did I learn (consciously or subconsciously) by viewing this film?
For example, here is what Cameron said at the film’s London premiere: “We have this tendency to just take what we want. And that’s how we treat the natural world as well. There’s this sense of we’re here, we’re big, we’ve got the guns, we’ve got the technology, therefore we’re entitled to every damn thing on this planet. That’s not how it works, and we’re going to find out the hard way if we don’t wise up and start seeking a life that’s in balance with the natural life on Earth.” (for more click here)
Here is a review that my friend Sean McDowell (teacher, author, and apologist) wrote about the Worldview of Avatar and then below is a resource for watching film in a whole new way.
“The year is 2154, and humans are attempting to mine the valuable mineral unabtanium from the planet Pandora. Humans have virtually destroyed their own planet and desperately need extra-planetary resources to survive. Jake Sully, a wounded marine, is assigned to infiltrate the seemingly hostile indigenous aliens (the Na’vi) to win their trust and talk them into relocating their colony, which happens to be situated right atop a massive amount of unabtanium.
If he can successfully infiltrate the Na’vi people and negotiate their relocation, then the humans will not have to force them to move through military intervention (those of you who are observant already notice the political insinuations about the U.S. allegedly only going to war in Iraq for oil).
To infiltrate the Na’vi, Jake transposes his consciousness into an Avatar body under the supervision of Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver).
Once inside Pandora, Jake meets Neytiri, a female alien who saves his life and introduces him to the rest of the Na’vi, who eventually accept him as one of their own. Neytiri plays the role of the mentor (ala Obi-One Kanobi, Mr. Miyagi, and Gandolf) who shows him all the ways of the Na’vi.
Through his experience with the Na’vi, Jake’s loyalty begins to change. He becomes a true Na’vi, which raises the question: which side will Jake choose? Avatar really tells the same story as movies such as The Last Samurai, Brother Bear, and Dances with Wolves—where a foreigner has preconceptions about an “alien” culture, yet upon spending time with them and learning their ways, realizes that his new “home” is truly the more benevolent, and that his original ways were really inhumane.
From the perspective of a 3-D film experience, Avatar is truly remarkable. I completely forgot that I was wearing glasses for most of the film! This is a huge step beyond the 3-D glasses with red and blue lenses (anyone remember Jaws 3?). The scenery on Pandora is nothing short of breathtaking. There are floating mountains, beautiful water falls, fascinating creatures, and luminescent plants that react to touch (Heaven?). Even though I think the film has potential to cause considerable spiritual confusion, I can’t help but give Cameron credit for his storytelling and creativity. Now, on to the worldview analysis…
ANTI-CAPITALISM
Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) plays a slimy, sleazy, flippant corporate “pig” only interested in the monetary bottom-line. His character is reminiscent of Paul Reiser from Aliens. He has no concern for the life on Pandora and is gladly willing to destroy them to obtain unabtanium unless a diplomatic solution can be reached. At one point Parker says to Grace, “What do they want? We’ve tried money and education, but nothing works.” The inference is clear: these nature-loving creatures don’t want anything that Western corporate capitalist culture has to offer. In fact, it’s the capitalists who need to learn a lesson from the Na’vi.
It might be possible to chalk this character up as a criticism of corporate greed rather than a criticism of capitalism per se. However, I’m just not convinced because this portrayal seems to go along too consistently with the anti-capitalist fervor that has been resonating in our culture recently. It’s certainly ironic that Avatar has a central character negatively portraying (and stereotyping) capitalists when it’s already grossed over 1 billion dollars! But this is a minor theme in the movie.
PANTHEISTIC SPIRITUALITY
It would be virtually impossible to miss the not-so-subtle pantheism that pervades the entire film. The Na’vi are spiritually connected to their entire world, including the plants and animals. Their home is a humongous tree, which is clearly representative of the idea of Mother Earth. The Na’vi are so connected to nature that they say of prayer of gratitude, and sometimes even cry, when they kill an animal for food. The audience is given a virtual lesson in pantheism while Neytiri mentors Jake into their way of life. A pantheistic explanation is given for EVERY aspect of life including what they eat, how they pray, how they worship the planet, and how they relate to each other. Avatar is filled with rituals that are overseen by a Shaman (there is a scene of tree worship that is so realistic my wife almost walked out. In her words, it was demonic).
The pantheistic worldview doesn’t simply play a background role to make the film plausible, like the Force does in Star Wars. Rather, pantheistic spirituality is literally preached to the audience through the characters and their interactions.
But there is a subtle difference that sets it apart from other pantheistic movies (such as Lion King, Pocahontas, or Star Wars).
SCIENTIFIC NATURALISM
While Avatar clearly portrays pantheistic spirituality in a positive light, I think it may be subtly subverting it with a naturalistic worldview. The naturalist in the film is clearly Grace Augustine (whose name is taken from St. Augustine who wrote, “The City of God”). She is the scientist who is constantly looking for a natural explanation for their spiritual behavior. While the Na’vi talk in spiritual terms (they describe “seeing” as looking into a person’s depth), there does seem to be a physical explanation lurking beneath all their behavior. Below the ground are cords that connect all the trees on the planet, like a giant network of computers. To “connect” with the animals, the Na’vi have to physically connect their hair to the animals’ manes. And to hear from their ancestors, they have to physically connect to the trees, not unlike connecting to the Internet. This is significantly different from the Star Wars films, for example, in which Luke, Yoda, and Darth Vader are capable of manipulating reality from a distance.
So, what is the moral of the story? Here’s my take: People ought to forsake greedy Western capitalism and embrace pantheistic spirituality, even though such practices have a perfectly natural explanation.
There is much more that could be discussed about in this film (e.g., environmentalism, or the way it portrays the military). I had great discussions in my classes this past week and have had many discussions with other young people as well. Even though this movie will likely cause considerable spiritual confusion, it provides a great opportunity for parents and youth workers to engage young people in worldview conversations…..”(Read the rest on his blog)
For an excellent training guide on how to watch films with discernment, see Hollywood Worldviews by film-maker Brian Godawa.
Product Description
“Do you watch movies with your eyes open?
You buy your tickets and concessions, and you walk into the theater. Celluloid images flash at twenty-four frames per second, and the hypnotic sequence of moving pictures coaxes you to suspend disbelief and be entertained by the implausible.
Unfortunately, many often suspend their beliefs as well, succumbing to subtle lessons in how to behave, think and even perceive reality. Do you find yourself hoping that a sister will succeed in seducing her sibling’s husband, that a thief will get away with his crime, that a serial killer will escape judgment? Do you, too, laugh at the bumbling priest and seethe at the intolerant and abusive evangelist? Do you embrace worldviews that infect your faith and then wonder, after your head is clear, whether your faith can survive the infection?
In this thoroughly revised and updated edition of his popular book, Brian Godawa guides you through the place of redemption in film, the tricks screenwriters use to communicate their messages, and the mental and spiritual discipline required for watching movies. Hollywood Worldviews helps you enter a dialogue with Hollywood that leads to a happier ending, one that keeps you aware of your culture and awake to your faith.”